Annalist Financial Statements

Get key findings

get_findings

Read-onlyIdempotent

The key findings of a company, written by fixed rules from its figures: each a sentence ready to quote with its rule, claim, state (New, Confirmed, Strengthened, Weakened), the period, the measure and the figures it states with their source document ids. Modules: overview (growth, margins, returns, net debt), credit (debt against the S&P benchmark bands), liquidity, quality (cash backing of earnings) and scores (Altman, Beneish, Piotroski). Pass history for the record of each finding across snapshots, and retired for findings that no longer apply.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "company": "<company>"
    },
    "name": "get_findings"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`module`	No	keep the findings of one module
`company`	Yes	company id from search_companies, for example apple or mizuho
`history`	No	true to add the records of each finding: state, change type, period and snapshot
`retired`	No	true to add the findings that no longer apply

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No
`page`	No
`as_of`	No
`count`	Yes
`company`	Yes
`modules`	No
`citation`	Yes
`findings`	Yes
`snapshot`	Yes
`conventions`	No
`corrections`	No
`findings_version`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already establish that this is read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that: the findings are rule-generated, the state vocabulary is disclosed, the module coverage is explained, and history/retired behavior is described. It does not mention auth requirements or rate limits, but the annotations reduce the burden there.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the purpose and then efficiently enumerates the module semantics and optional flags. It is somewhat dense and run-on, but every clause contributes useful information and there is no obvious filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the annotations, full schema description coverage and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete enough for an agent to call the tool correctly. It explains what the findings contain, what each module covers, and what the optional history and retired flags do.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description meaningfully enriches the module enum by explaining what overview, credit, liquidity, quality and scores contain, and it clarifies that history returns records across snapshots while retired includes findings that no longer apply.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the resource: key findings for a company, generated by fixed rules from its figures, with a sentence, rule, claim, state, period, measure and source document ids. It is specific enough to distinguish findings from raw ratios or overview data, but it does not explicitly name sibling tools or contrast itself with get_ratios/get_company_overview.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied through the module list and the history/retired flags, which tell the agent how to broaden or narrow the result. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose get_findings over siblings such as get_company_overview or get_ratios, nor any stated exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Annalist Financial Statements tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?